What did you expect. . otte rco QUE? points off of X and Y' s review score because it still feels like a Pokemon game' Well what the do they expect it he feel l
x
Click to expand

What did you expect

otte rco QUE?
points off of X
and Y' s review score because it
still feels like a Pokemon game'
Well what the **** do they expect
it he feel like
...
  • Recommend tagsx
+1627
Views: 68540
Favorited: 148
Submitted: 10/10/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to angrybarts Subscribe to pokemon submit to reddit

Comments(324):

[ 324 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #1 - chronomancer (10/10/2013) [-]
"Like Skyrim with Pokeballs" -IGN
#51 to #1 - feffog (10/10/2013) [-]
actually IGN said x and y was **** for having too linear of a storyline


meanwhile skyward ********* got 10/10, a higher rating than skyrim saying it was the best game of all the zelda series
User avatar #302 to #51 - makonendrak ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
Woulda been better if you said " ******** Sword"
User avatar #251 to #51 - lolshadowjewtwo (10/11/2013) [-]
I thought Skyward Sword was great. Not the best, but still great.
+4
#203 to #1 - utarefson has deleted their comment [-]
#9 to #1 - deepfriedchocolate (10/10/2013) [-]
skyrim x pokemon? well we can dream
User avatar #262 to #12 - trivdiego (10/11/2013) [-]
holy **** mewtwo is nightmare fuel
#8 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
they also took a point of it for having random battles
#288 to #8 - Rascal (10/11/2013) [-]
Are you ******* serious?
#7 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
And yet Madden and **** will still get 9's and 10's.
User avatar #298 to #7 - oceanfrank (10/11/2013) [-]
except they dont....
User avatar #13 to #7 - chaosnazo (10/10/2013) [-]
That's the power of money
User avatar #15 to #13 - theticklemaster (10/10/2013) [-]
Same with Call Of Duty...Probably the best games according to reviews, but it's the same friggin' game every year!
User avatar #4 - nospyonme (10/10/2013) [-]
I think that means "they didnt pay us money to test it"
User avatar #281 to #4 - ompalomper (10/11/2013) [-]
dude, you know who you can trust nowadays with things like this? i know rockpapershotgun are always fair but other then them?
User avatar #282 to #281 - nospyonme (10/11/2013) [-]
I usually just ask a random person on steam about any game
User avatar #284 to #282 - ompalomper (10/11/2013) [-]
that sounds reasonable, but do we really have time for rational solutions here?
#286 to #284 - nospyonme (10/11/2013) [-]
Just pour water on it.
Just pour water on it.
#14 to #4 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Well how do you think those ****** overly repetitive Batman games keep getting 10's according to gameinformer
User avatar #17 to #14 - Gandalfthewhite (10/10/2013) [-]
there's been 2 recent batman games and countless ****** overly repetitive pokemon games
#267 to #17 - iamaniceperson (10/11/2013) [-]
One must not insult the Pokemons on FJ, or red thunbs you shall drown in
User avatar #46 to #4 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
It might mean that there are ten pokemon games, and they all play the same way, so maybe Ninty should make something more original with pokemon.
User avatar #63 to #46 - commontroll (10/10/2013) [-]
And every Grand Theft Auto plays the same, and every Battlefield, and every Call of Duty, and every Prototype, and every Mortal Combat game.

And all those get high ratings, despite being the same damn game with slight changes.
User avatar #226 to #63 - folkflunky (10/10/2013) [-]
I'm not gonna lie, I don't give a **** they don't change a lot.

You can't expect games to make a 180 degrees turn. I like Battlefield because of how it is, slightly realistic but still not a simulator. I like GTA because of how it is, incredibly silly sometimes, but showing very serious problems.

I don't want GTA to become Saint's Row and I don't want Battlefield to become Call of Duty. I want them to stay how they are.

And what I'm talking about here is about the gameplay. The story can change, I gotta admit I'm a little tired of the generic "america saves the day " ******** . But as long as the game is the same, I don't care. Ubisoft changed the **** out of Ghost Recon with Future Soldier and I've never seen such a ********* about it. You can't change because most people will bitch about it. So just leave games be what they are. Let GTA be that silly but serious story. Let Battlefield be that slightly realistic and generic ******** . And I could name a lot of games that people complain about but if they changed the bitching would be off the charts, like Dark Souls.
User avatar #315 to #226 - commontroll (10/11/2013) [-]
If you read my other comments, you'd see that's what I'm saying. It's not bad to say a game is the same. It's just retarded to act like it's bad for some and good with others.
User avatar #64 to #63 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
Not every battlefield plays the same, or call of duty, or mortal kombat.
There have only been two prototype games.
I cant speak for GTA as Ive only played V.
Pokemon is the same grindfest every time with new pokemon added in, which doesnt change the way the game is.
Pokemon games have the same basic story everytime as well.
At least battlefield changes the way it plays or feels or even looks, while pokemon does none of that.
User avatar #69 to #64 - commontroll (10/10/2013) [-]
How have the pokemon games not changed how they look? Have you seen the progress they've made throughout the years? The only thing that's the same is the angle that you view the world, which is the same in every Battlefield game.

Now don't get me wrong, I've only played a couple pokemon games. They're fun, but not amazing to me. But they're made for kids, so of course they're basic stories and such. But you can give a game a story, but nobody really cares about it. Not unless it's Gears of War, Halo, Mass Effect, or Elder Scrolls.

All those games I listed there are the same as the game before for the most part, except for slight graphical changes. Sure there's some differences between Call of Duty games. Especially between Treyarch and Activision ones. I actually respect Treyarch because they change it up a bit and try to add new things.

But, they're not that different from the Pokemon games. And here's the thing, nobody cares. Nobody ever cares if a game is the exact same as the one before except the people who dislike it. The people who dislike it will buy the new version that's the same, and then talk about how it's crap compared to the old one because it's too different.

So there we have it. Nobody cares except the haters, so game developers don't bother.
User avatar #105 to #69 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon as a whole has been the same over and over with a very slight change in graphics, which means they are rehashes.
Unlike call of duty where the game control changes, the way the game is played changes, and there are different things added in an attempt to keep the series fresh.

You are wrong in the fact that no one cares about story in games.

I agree with you about how GoW, Halo, and Mass Effect are basically the same, I never said they werent.

The elder scrolls have changed more than any pokemon game and if you think otherwise you are retarded.

Everything else I agree on, the review was when the "haters" began to care, which means that Ninty should try something new.


User avatar #122 to #105 - commontroll (10/10/2013) [-]
What? Dude, I was saying GoW, Halo, Mass Effect, and Elder Scrolls are the only games people care about the story with. Good lord, do you not read what other people type?

Besides, Halo has actually been very good about always adding a new feature and always changing up the game in large ways.

Halo 2 introduced two characters with two different abilities and a very good dual wielding system, as well as online matchmaking. You can bet your titties that you use some of the things they integrated into that game, and those things sure as hell were not there in the first one.

Halo 3 introduced Theater and Forge modes, allowing you to go and view your games from any angle you want and make videos and take screenshots with it (and that's a feature that games only started commonly introducing after Halo 3 did it) and the Forge mode lets you make your own maps change things up so they're your own version, still haven't seen that in any other shooter game.

Halo ODST was a game Bungie did not want to make, and they were forced to by Microsoft. Yet they still brought in Firefight mode, which is a damn good game mode. It also changed the game a lot because you were suddenly a fragile and frail regular (comparatively) human instead of a super soldier.

Halo Reach you had a universal character system, and a universal leveling system, and all of the things that had been added into the other games were put into it. They had a commendation system, they had a game that put your character into the cut scenes, they had new weapons (and just just same gun, new skin, completely new weapons, as they did in every game before) and new gameplay. They added assassinations, they added daily and weekly challenges.

Also each game had increasing amounts of customization of your character.

So go ahead, tell me more about how Halo never changes anything, and COD and Battlefield do. COD added diving and zombies. They also had credits and removed them. Halo only removed things when 343 took over.
#132 to #122 - adding (10/10/2013) [-]
adding
User avatar #127 to #122 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
What do you mean by "GoW, Halo, Mass Effect, and Elder Scrolls are the only games people care about the story with.", then?

Because I read, "The only games where people care about the story are these games."

Also, I never said anything bad about halo, ive never even played halo. And CoD added multiplayer, zombies, different game modes, new controls, new weapons, new looks, and a new story every time.
User avatar #138 to #127 - commontroll (10/10/2013) [-]
I mean those are the only games I've run into people actually caring about what the story is and what happens in it.

You said they were all the same, and they're not was the point of my comment. I know that the COD game has changed a lot, but when people talk about how COD, they generally just mean from when 4 came out. Even the first three were all the same for the most part.

But as I've said, it's okay if a game is the same, but to act like some games are the same as the one before, while others aren't is just ridiculous. And to act like a game is worse because it's basically the same thing with slight changes is even more ridiculous. I've just always hated Game Informer's reviews, because they'll say one game is terrible because it's the same thing every time with new maps, and then say the complete opposite about other games.
User avatar #148 to #138 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
And just to add, most game reviews are stupid because they are payed.
User avatar #147 to #138 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
I agree with you for the most part, you are right, but in my opinion Pokemon has been the same since red, with the only real deviation being emerald and silver, coincidentally my favorite two.
User avatar #151 to #147 - commontroll (10/10/2013) [-]
I agree, thing is, we both don't really play pokemon. It's always easy to see things as the same when you're looking at it from the outside. It's like when people think of America. People in other countries think of just one thing, but in America people see how different all the different parts are.
0
#199 to #127 - chezburgadominator has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #152 to #46 - meganinja (10/10/2013) [-]
I don't think you've thought about your statement. Every generation there has been added more and more optional side quests.
User avatar #154 to #152 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
Like?
User avatar #155 to #154 - meganinja (10/10/2013) [-]
Secret bases, sand collecting, beauty contests, underground mining, making movies, battle tower, and all deviants of that, game rooms, etc. That's just off the top of my head.
User avatar #157 to #155 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
Those arent "sidequests" those are small games that mean nothing and add nothing to the game.
User avatar #160 to #157 - meganinja (10/10/2013) [-]
Well there's your problem. You aren't open to change. They add all this additional stuff to the game, but all you want to do is level your pokemon, and beat the game. Why do you care whether they release additional stuff if you're not going to use it in the first place?
User avatar #162 to #160 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
If they mattered to the game and changed it at all I would care. Its like hats on tf2 or items on FJ, they dont mean anything.

And thanks you arent my therapist, and Im pretty sure im "open to change", and pokemon is not
User avatar #170 to #162 - meganinja (10/10/2013) [-]
I'm guessing double battles, triple battles, rotation battles, the dark grass that has stronger pokemon appear, sometimes as a double battle, the addition of ******** of new itmes, AND THE ******* ADDITION OF FAIRY TYPE aren't changes that effect gameplay either?

What do you want them to ******* do? Switch over to a different genre every time they make a new game to keep it interesting? I mean you can walk diagonally now for ****** sake.
User avatar #174 to #170 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
Ooh walking diagonally.

I lost interest in this argument when I realized you were thumbing me down for no reason, so have fun.
User avatar #186 to #174 - meganinja (10/10/2013) [-]
I like the part where you thumbed me down for no reason, so I responded likewise. I'm sorry that you're too stuck up to realize this, but Pokemon has changed a lot. They are continuing to change with every game they make. In addition to the roughly 100 or so pokemon they add every game, they add multiple sidequests, new mini games, and new game mechanics. All of this for a very young fan base where they could simply add a small amount of new pokemon with updated graphics and they'd buy it. They don't have to do it for us, because we're not the main fan base. Sure, we're a large part of the fan base, but we're not the majority.

There's only so much that the creators can do while maintaining the fact that's it's still a pokemon game. And with what they can do, they're doing a lot.
User avatar #189 to #186 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
<3
User avatar #53 to #46 - nospyonme (10/10/2013) [-]
If it works, dont fix it
#211 to #53 - pudgykoala (10/10/2013) [-]
yeah, CoD is great the way it is
#204 to #46 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
every COD game plays like an fps
every pokemon game plays like a pokemon game.
u say pokemon doesnt add anything each new game? have u played more then 1 pokemon game? or even 1 pokemon game? they add new stuff all the time.
eg:battle tower,battle train,pokemon theather,dream world(online),new pokemon etc .
think of it this way: u play any FPS to shoot ppl ,
u play pokemon to catch/train/battle em all
User avatar #54 to #46 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
It obviously isnt working for some people.
#67 to #54 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Because there aren't spinoffs with different gameplay or anything...
User avatar #68 to #67 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
And if those work, fine but they need to keep changing instead of going back to the same old
#70 to #68 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Those spinoffs do get sequels and thats where your varied gameplay comes in. The main series pokemon games should not get a different formula, especially now that they've stuck to it for so long. Even if the games use the same formula, however, you cannot deny that a lot has changed since the old days of red and blue.
User avatar #98 to #70 - robobloxx (10/10/2013) [-]
I can deny that a lot has changed since red and blue considering theyre almost the same game.

But its nice to know how many hypocrites are on FJ defending pokemon, but putting down call of duty for doing the same thing pokemon does.
User avatar #200 to #98 - welliguessitsaname (10/10/2013) [-]
Okay.

Pokemon is stupid and repetitive and Call of Duty is awesome and original. Does that make you happy?

If you're not a troll, I must commend you for your courage, however
User avatar #290 to #200 - robobloxx (10/11/2013) [-]
Its half trolling, half serious. I dont really care for pokemon,but I know enough not to legitimately say it.


The underlined text was kind of the give away huh?
#233 to #68 - Rascal (10/11/2013) [-]
Actually, changing the established formula is one of the riskiest things you could possibly do to a franchise, as it usually doesn't go over well with the majority of the fanbase. For example, let's take a good look at Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts. That game had a huge change in formula from the first two games. Last time I checked, fans of the other 2 games for the most part outright despise Nuts and Bolts. Changing the formula too much results in the fans getting alienated. You need to change the formula just the right amount to prevent the series from becoming monotonous and keep enough the same to prevent the ire of the fanbase. In my opinion, Pokemon has done just that, took enough risks to keep the series fresh while simultaneously didn't take too many risks to feel too different.
User avatar #5 to #4 - chronomancer (10/10/2013) [-]
Truth incarnate.
#86 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
"It still feels like a Pokémon game, but the ease of player control, the updated art direction, 3D graphics, and the scaling of the world make everything more inviting, attractive, and fun." -GI

I think GI was merely stating even with the changes that it still feels like Pokemon, not that its downgraded because of it
User avatar #149 to #121 - keatontheghostfox ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Anons have been getting alot more intelligent since everyone started getting banned. coincidence, I think not.
#129 - drtrousersnake ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
what about CoD, madden, and every other game they give high scores to?
User avatar #145 to #129 - ithyphallophobia **User deleted account** (10/10/2013) [-]
Yes, they are all the exact same thing. Year after year. No difference between the 2003 and 2013 games, nothing at all.
#253 to #145 - theism ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
Well the changes accumulate over time so if you look at the oldest and the newest you'll see an enormous difference. But compare say the most recent 2 and it's pretty similar.
User avatar #310 to #253 - bookyle (10/11/2013) [-]
no, I'll disagree with that. In cod 4 you run around with a mp5 silenced and jump out windows and get kill streaks. In bo2 you run around with mp7 silenced and jump off second floors and climb roofs. It's pretty much plays the same. Of course there are added elements like more perks,attachments, guns, ect... but it still plays the same, that being just rush everywhere and you'll get the most kills.
User avatar #171 to #145 - capslockrage (10/10/2013) [-]
I agree that madden is the same thing every year, but CoD's actually change quite a lot, especially recently.
Black ops 2 looks nothing at all like mw3, and Ghosts looks nothing like black ops 2.
User avatar #175 to #171 - ithyphallophobia **User deleted account** (10/10/2013) [-]
I know, I was being a sarcastic asshole...lol.
But the maddens are different. you can tell a difference even between Madden 11 and the one out now (Madden 25 but it's technically Madden 14).
User avatar #177 to #175 - capslockrage (10/10/2013) [-]
Ah.

Well I haven't really played madden very much, but all I have seen from it is that you play football with the same mechanics and same teams, just with updated stats and some new graphics.
User avatar #240 to #177 - ithyphallophobia **User deleted account** (10/11/2013) [-]
Well one example I can give is on Madden 11, there's a creative mode where you can basically make a team from scratch...
You make the jerseys, what color they are, the teams stadium, you pick the players on the team, everything. It was a ton of fun but for whatever reason they took it out of the game in Madden 12 and all the ones since.
#184 - arcticassassin (10/10/2013) [-]
5/10
"Not Modern Warfare"
-IGN
User avatar #202 to #184 - kyrill ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
8/10
"not modern warfare, literally unplayable and a waste of money"
-IGN
User avatar #194 to #184 - keatontheghostfox ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I normally go by metacritic
#218 to #194 - furiousmarshmellow (10/10/2013) [-]
I normally go by my opinions and tastes.
User avatar #221 to #218 - keatontheghostfox ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Hard to go by if you never played any in the series :p
User avatar #223 to #221 - furiousmarshmellow (10/10/2013) [-]
If I see a game that looks cool, I'll try it. If I don't like it, then that's fine.
User avatar #263 to #223 - acemcgunner (10/11/2013) [-]
try gears of war.
User avatar #272 to #263 - furiousmarshmellow (10/11/2013) [-]
I have.


It's not bad. Not amazing, but not god awful.
User avatar #277 to #272 - acemcgunner (10/11/2013) [-]
i am a fan boy...so yeah..
User avatar #225 to #223 - keatontheghostfox ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I go by gameplay videos mostly and I use metacritic as a general idea because they go by several reviewers scores which help balance out biased reviews.
User avatar #31 - ImmortalBaconEater (10/10/2013) [-]
I love how the same people who complain non stop about how call of duty is just the same thing every year are the people who go nuts whenever a new pokemon game comes out. It's really just a preference of what kind of game you like. If you really loved the gameplay on the original of a game, small changes are generally enough to keep your interest. I honestly love both the pokemon and call of duty series and always enjoy the new games, even if it is really just small changes. I don't see why there has to be so much hate over companies re-hashing stuff that we loved cause its still fun. And as long as someone is enjoying the game they are playing, it isn't anyones place to tell them that theres anything wrong with it.
#193 to #31 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
they both are cookie cutter games, if you can skip two games in a the series and NOT feel like you missed out on anything important then you have too many games to have any sort of innovative quality. Imagine if they released a new elder scrolls game every ******* year, the time between Morrowind and Oblivion could have easily taken a decade or more if they were rushing to constantly put a games on the market. But hey you guys love those small differences..........how about some DLC between games but get the games done right
User avatar #325 to #31 - cyborgturtle (10/24/2013) [-]
I know that I am quite damn late to respond. But most people (including me) hate MOST (not all) of Call of Duty's fan base.
#34 to #31 - bluemagebrilly ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I think it's like that because the "new" Pokemon games all have significant differences and the whole point you play them is for the story and collecting Pokemon.

Call of Duty's main focus is the multi-player, and that's been the same thing for a long long time. Only the whole "Nazi Zombie" thing really saved Call of Duty from falling out, and now they're milking it by forcing people to buy their whole games just for that small aspect.

I'll admit Pokemon has been relatively the same the whole time, but it's not a game that can easily change. They could have changed Call of Duty a lot, they just refused
User avatar #38 to #34 - ImmortalBaconEater (10/10/2013) [-]
The call of duty games have also had relatively significant changes to the multiplayer over the years (and its been around for a lot less time than pokemon). And at this point nazi zombies could be marketed as a game by it's self. Even though they could have changed both games a lot, I think they chose not to because thats what people enjoyed. Both franchises really are just making games that the fans want to buy, and people like what is familiar. And honestly, I don't think theres anything wrong with that. I'm not saying that people should only play one game that they like over and over, but that its ok to keep going back to something you really enjoyed. The fact is that neither game is really based on ground breaking new developments, but on gameplay that is engaging over and over. In fact both games are extremely repetitive, pokemon with the same battle system throughout the game, and call of duty with the same combat system in multiplayer. The fun part is finding new ways to win within that limited system. Thats what all competition is based on really. Its the same in sports. You set rules that everyone plays by and its up to the individual to find a way to gain an advantage within those confines.
#43 to #38 - bluemagebrilly ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I read through what you said but I don't really understand what message you're trying to convey. I can only disagree with the multiplayer aspect you stated at the beginning; Call of Duty hasn't changed much. They take out a perk, put in a perk, nerf a perk, buff a perk, add a gun, change a gun, remove a gun, but the whole thing is relatively the same.    
   
Pokemon hasn't changed much either, but it has definitely changed more than Call of Duty has in the past few years, especially with the recent X and Y.
I read through what you said but I don't really understand what message you're trying to convey. I can only disagree with the multiplayer aspect you stated at the beginning; Call of Duty hasn't changed much. They take out a perk, put in a perk, nerf a perk, buff a perk, add a gun, change a gun, remove a gun, but the whole thing is relatively the same.

Pokemon hasn't changed much either, but it has definitely changed more than Call of Duty has in the past few years, especially with the recent X and Y.
User avatar #44 to #43 - ImmortalBaconEater (10/10/2013) [-]
Personally, I disagree that pokemon has changed more, but that is certainly up for debate. Really, the point I was trying to get to is that it doesn't matter that they didn't change much. Its the repetative nature of the games that makes them so fun in the first place.
#49 to #44 - bluemagebrilly ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I don't disagree with that. People can enjoy what they want, I was merely saying my little piece on why people complain about Call of Duty so much and not Pokemon, which is similar in the way it puts out games. It's also possible that most, though not all, Call of Duty fans are very... childish. They just like it for the violence most of the time, at least in my experience.
#227 to #38 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon Z. for Zombies......
User avatar #37 to #34 - tacogrenade (10/10/2013) [-]
your fuking stupid there more or less the same...

Collect pokemon, get badges

Kill people, rank up WITH bad ass Campaign...

Cause making BILLIONS of dollars is ALMOST "Falling out"
#42 to #37 - bluemagebrilly ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I think you read two words of what I said then snapped.

But the two games are nothing alike, other than their inability to change a huge significant amount about themselves. You kill people, but you've been killing people the same way for like 10 games. I haven't had a battle with a gym leader that was exactly the same 10 games ago.

Also, this is just a personal opinion really, I never liked the campaign. It was kind of boring. Not saying the Pokemon story is better, since it has its boring moments, but the Call of Duty campaigns didn't really mean anything.

... And don't pretend that if they didn't have Nazi Zombies they wouldn't have fallen out. Yeah they made a huge amount of money, it's impossible not to with them, but that game mode made a lot of people buy that game.
User avatar #45 to #42 - tacogrenade (10/10/2013) [-]
Ima admit on the whole get at you ( ******* HATE pokemon fanboys) but i still disagree with you... Pokemon has a HORRIBLE story IF ANY! Call of duty at least trys... Its just the COOL thing to hate cod cause its Multiplayer is frustrating afff i ALLL OF YOUU KNOWW ITT!!
#304 to #45 - Rascal (10/11/2013) [-]
Pokemon has such a bad story it's sparked a tv show that still continues to this day... As someone who mostly browses the frontpage this is the first time I will ever say "you went full retard." So, seriously dood, you just went full retard with that.
#99 to #45 - Visual (10/10/2013) [-]
Call of Duty had an interesting story in Call of Duty 4, then it kinda stopped after Modern Warfare 2 (			****		 BLACK OPS). But even since CoD4, the story has always been lack-luster because the action situations were very repetitive throughout the story.    
   
Sure Pokemon really has more of a narrative because all you do it battle trainers but at least the trainers mix up their types and you feel a sense of progression rather than waiting for the next checkpoint to come up so you can say &quot;Great at least I know I'm finishing the level&quot;.
Call of Duty had an interesting story in Call of Duty 4, then it kinda stopped after Modern Warfare 2 ( **** BLACK OPS). But even since CoD4, the story has always been lack-luster because the action situations were very repetitive throughout the story.

Sure Pokemon really has more of a narrative because all you do it battle trainers but at least the trainers mix up their types and you feel a sense of progression rather than waiting for the next checkpoint to come up so you can say "Great at least I know I'm finishing the level".
User avatar #76 to #45 - xxhadesflamesxx (10/10/2013) [-]
your a cunt but its funny watching you get angry
#48 to #45 - bluemagebrilly ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I never said Pokemon had a good story. The stories are pretty goofy, honestly, but they have to abide to kid ratings for some reason. Not really sure what you said at the end there, but Call of Duty does /not/ try. It just sells what it knows will sell to those with money and 'like' the game.
User avatar #50 to #48 - tacogrenade (10/10/2013) [-]
your breaking my balls brilly
#190 to #31 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Person opinion: pokemon gets a hundred or so new pokemon, Call of Duty gets a lot less new content than that.
User avatar #61 to #31 - ThpiderMan (10/10/2013) [-]
I enjoy Call of Duty, I enjoy pokemon, but I only buy new games when they have something new to offer. Last CoD game I bought was Black Ops, because of how much I enjoyed Nazi Zombies in WaW, but i didn't buy BO2 because I played the zombies mode at a friends and it felt the same. Last pokemon game I bought was Pearl, just because it was the first pokemon game on ds, and it was still very similar and not fresh enough. I agree with both sides in that I think both could do a lot more to innovate, I might buy X/Y because of all the new stuff present I've seen, as of yet CoD Ghosts hasn't enticed me, but I'll wait and see.

Not everyone is just mindlessly blathering, both series have been stagnant for a while in my opinion, but considering how much I absolutely loved CoD 2 and the original Modern Warfare, and how ingrained pokemon is into my childhood, more specifically the first 2 generations, It's pretty hard for me to hate either series, regardless of innovative lapses.
User avatar #222 to #61 - kombee (10/10/2013) [-]
I completely agree with you
User avatar #84 to #31 - Gandalfthewhite (10/10/2013) [-]
call of duty's popular, you know these ******** have to hate everything that's popular
#205 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #16 - lorddarkskull (10/10/2013) [-]
Yeah, game informer, the magazine funded by sony and microsoft, is known for giving fair reviews to nintendo games
#62 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Hate on cod for being the same, then suck nintendos dick every time a new pokemon game comes out, nice logic funnyjunk fags.
#266 to #62 - mrmeatman **User deleted account** (10/11/2013) [-]
&quot;Nintendo's Mario team really don't seem to have any ambition besides subsisting on bits of crust they can scrape from the pimply underbelly of nostalgia, lest anything as dangerous as a new idea appear in their brains and give them a 			*******		 seizure.   
   
But as the disbelieving friend said to the inventor of the feces-powered helicopter, &quot;This 			****		 will not fly!&quot; What really has been the point of the last 15 years of you're just going to make Mario 3 again complete with chirpy NES sound effects still intact? On what is ostensibly a current-generation console, no less?&quot;- Yahtzee Croshaw
"Nintendo's Mario team really don't seem to have any ambition besides subsisting on bits of crust they can scrape from the pimply underbelly of nostalgia, lest anything as dangerous as a new idea appear in their brains and give them a ******* seizure.

But as the disbelieving friend said to the inventor of the feces-powered helicopter, "This **** will not fly!" What really has been the point of the last 15 years of you're just going to make Mario 3 again complete with chirpy NES sound effects still intact? On what is ostensibly a current-generation console, no less?"- Yahtzee Croshaw
#269 to #266 - mrmeatman **User deleted account** (10/11/2013) [-]
The same applies to Pokemon, as people suck Nintendo's dick when they're rehashing the same formula over and over. But when Call of Duty does it "HUR DUR ITZ DA SAME THING OVR AGAN" Nintendo only gets a free pass because you were raised on their games so all the **** they do is forgivable. Stop being ******* hypocrites and open your ******* eyes.
#73 to #62 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
'Don't fix what isn't broken'

If pokemon is a reliable car, CoD is a bicycle missing a wheel...
User avatar #77 to #73 - randomserb (10/10/2013) [-]
No, it's not. CoD works pretty much the same way as pokemon. Buy the new game to lose all the progress you had in the last one, only to get it back until the next one comes out. Rinse and repeat with no real goal.
User avatar #85 to #77 - thatguyontheright ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Except that Pokemon has the capacity for a near limitless amount of replay ability with a huge stock of characters to choose from, you can have any combination of monsters you want.


Call of Duty, it's just a stock FPS...rinse and repeat. The genre has gotten stale.
#213 to #85 - pudgykoala (10/10/2013) [-]
You can try all sorts of classes with different guns/attachments. Stop being a hypocrite, faggot
User avatar #88 to #85 - kinginyellow (10/10/2013) [-]
Coming from a person who obviously just watched multiplayer footage. The stories aren't amazing but they have depth and actual character development, and all the different modes for hours of fun.
You don't like it? Doesn't make it bad
User avatar #93 to #88 - thatguyontheright ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
The only draw to CoD is the multiplayer, and I don't feel like spending $60 on a game to have a 12 year old scream at me, saying he ****** my mother.
User avatar #95 to #93 - kinginyellow (10/10/2013) [-]
Oh ya, because the mute button doesn't exist right? And any disruptive players are auto-muted to give fair warning. On top of that, there are rarely people who are like you described, it's just an over exaggerated strawman people cling to to hate CoD
User avatar #101 to #95 - thatguyontheright ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
You're lucky. I rarely play any game online for that reason, whether it be Battlefield, CoD, Halo, etc. I'll play them single player or local multiplayer with friends...just not online.
User avatar #110 to #101 - kinginyellow (10/10/2013) [-]
Ya honestly if there were a lot of those kids they've just left because most people stick to party chat or just don't talk period anymore. Kinda peaceful
User avatar #89 to #85 - randomserb (10/10/2013) [-]
Except that Call of Duty has the capacity for a near limitless amount of replayability with a huge stock of guns to choose from, and you can play on any maps you want.

Pokemon, it's just a monster collection game... rinse and repeat. The genre has gotten stale.
#11 - jjholt (10/10/2013) [-]
+4
#230 - dirtywizarder **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #236 to #230 - minnten (10/11/2013) [-]
well, it doesn't say they took points of for it, but in the paragraph right above the "online multiplayer" section, it says:

It still feels like a Pokémon game, but the ease of player control, the updated art direction, 3D graphics, and the scaling of the world make everything more inviting, attractive, and fun.
0
#239 to #236 - dirtywizarder **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #248 to #239 - minnten (10/11/2013) [-]
I agree. I was just pointing out that the sentence is there though.
#212 - pudgykoala (10/10/2013) [-]
"OMG COD NEVER CHANGES **** THOSE **** **** **** GAMES"
"RAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH POKEMANS AND MURIO DONT GET 10000/10???????????????????????????????? WHYYYYYYYY **** I PISSED MY LITTLE PISSY BITCH PANTS
**** you, you hypocritical faggots
#237 to #212 - rubiksoctohedron **User deleted account** (10/11/2013) [-]
User avatar #234 to #212 - zarcos (10/11/2013) [-]
They add new pokemon/moves/types all the time and are constantly changing gameplay, sure the core mechanics remain the same but each one is way different. Also, there is progression in the game and it's incredibly difficult and time-consuming to beat everything in the game, but ultimately possible. In CoD you play endlessly with little to no progression, so it ends up being the same experience over and over.
#242 to #234 - pudgykoala (10/11/2013) [-]
Switch up the weapons/attachments and perks and kill streaks etc. All new story each time exploring the past/present/future. Pokemon games literally all have the exact same story. 10/first pokemon/evil orginization/stop them/somehow catch all powerful 1 of a kind pokemon/beat elite 4/become champ. Add new pokemon? CoD adds guns and maps and game modes. Hating CoD and defending Pokemon when they share the EXACT same "re-release every game" problem is BEYOND hypocritical. ALL Nintendo games are the same thing over again. (Sometimes, literally) I don't mind Pokemon or CoD, but people that say this **** piss me off. Unless you honestly think sitting on benches and diagonal movement are ground breaking. seriously
User avatar #244 to #242 - zarcos (10/11/2013) [-]
The weapon attachments, perks and kill streaks names' only change, the story has always been **** , the "new" guns are just reskins of old guns, and the gamemodes have hardly changed at all. Also recreating a good game is smart recreating a ****** game is ******* stupid.
#246 to #244 - pudgykoala (10/11/2013) [-]
Oh, so your opinion that CoD has a **** story is fact? Yeah, I think Pokemon has a much worse story. When Ghost died in MW2... that was amazing. Oh, I stopped team plasma or something? Hmm, familiar. Now, X/Y also "reskin" pokemon as "megas". Pokemon's turn based grindfest has changed about the same amount if not less. And recreating a good game doesn't do Nintendo justice,more like "milk this nostalgia cow until it literally starts squirting dust"
User avatar #247 to #246 - zarcos (10/11/2013) [-]
lol k go play your mediocre fps kid, I'll be playing my game that actually requires a semblance of strategy.
#250 to #247 - pudgykoala (10/11/2013) [-]
Lol alright bro, sorry that I just gave ya some facts with a bit of opinion. Also, most FPSs take strategy. I mean, no strategy, you get killed. In pokemon, "oh, this type beats this type" some hard ass thinking right thurr! Sure, the competetive players make it seem like a big deal, but they're worse than CoD fanboys
User avatar #314 to #250 - zarcos (10/11/2013) [-]
You obviously don't play against other people in pokemon, and FPS's dont take strategy they take muscle memory from repetitive actions.
#224 to #212 - fishtacos (10/10/2013) [-]
Calm your tits.
User avatar #265 - ponyplush (10/11/2013) [-]
I buy things for that feels
#214 - furiousmarshmellow (10/10/2013) [-]
&gt;Listening to Game Informer
>Listening to Game Informer
#21 - Hightower ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon has basically been the same game since the first one. Nothing but minor graphical upgrades and changing the pokemon themselves. I mean, the biggest advance in the series is being able to walk at an angle...
User avatar #75 to #21 - xdeathspawnx (10/10/2013) [-]
do you know how long it takes to design 150+ pokemon that all have to be balanced takes? That's a pretty big update in my book. At least they don't just recycle the first 151 pokemon over and over again. Its not like every madden game has different players, the majority of them are the same from the year before.
#209 to #21 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
have u ppl played more then 1 pokemon game???? odd how ppl say pokemon doesnt change anything.
changes: characters, towns, maps if those dont matter then dream world(online), battle tower,battle train, NEW pokemon(and dont say gen 1 is the best,geodude was a rock with arms)
I play pokemon to catch/battle/train pokemon. I play COD to shoot ppl. why would they change play style?
#317 to #209 - Hightower ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
The gameplay has not changed in 15 years man. Nothing you said refutes that. Aside from visual changes , the game is the same. Sorry if that offends you in some way, but it's true.
#231 to #21 - amonomous (10/11/2013) [-]
Not really.
User avatar #280 to #21 - Johnsfer (10/11/2013) [-]
No, you are so wrong it hurts me.
#316 to #280 - Hightower ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
What different gameplay mechanic does the new game offer that wasn't in the first one released in 1998?
User avatar #318 to #316 - Johnsfer (10/11/2013) [-]
Breeding
EV Training
Weather
Double/Triple Battles
1v5 pokemon battles
That's just a few
To say that Pokemon Red and Blue are the same game as X and Y is slightly correct, in that you are still catching pokemon, you are still trying to get to the elite four, but there is so much on the side to do now that cannot be done in the first games. To say that is to say that the very first CoD is basically the same as BO2, only graphics change and changes in the guns themselves and thats it.
#320 to #318 - Hightower ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
So in 15 years with 18 sequels there have 4 minor changes to gameplay (weather is not a gameplay mechanic) and you disagree with me why?
User avatar #322 to #320 - Johnsfer (10/11/2013) [-]
I never said those are the only changes ******* , quit sticking to this retarded argument without even looking at the other side.
I can see that yes there are obviously going to be similar in gameplay throughout all the games, but that doesn't mean that the only changes are sprites, stats and graphics.
#319 to #318 - Hightower ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
You do realize you are arguing against what the game creators have said, don't you? Junichi Masuda, the director of Game Freak compared Pokemon to the annual sports games and says it hasn't changed much in 15 years. When the games parent company admits it's the same game over and over with, like I said in my post, nothing but minor changes, your argument loses some traction.
User avatar #321 to #319 - Johnsfer (10/11/2013) [-]
And yet I have just finished posting many different things that prove that the game has been changing, no matter what they say, it's not an annual game, while the core game stays similar, there are so many changes I can't even name them all.
Even the core game has changed like I said, Shiny Pokemon, Weather is a gameplay mechanic, if you actually played pokemon you would know, multiple pokemon per battle, sky battles, megaevolutions and even actual plots.
User avatar #29 to #21 - admiralen ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
except thats the point of sequels, you get more of what you liked last time, they give you new maps, new pokemon, new battles and new graphics etc.
User avatar #22 to #21 - soupkittenagain (10/10/2013) [-]
What about how the characters look more 3D?
#23 to #22 - Hightower ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
"minor graphical upgrades "
User avatar #33 to #23 - alstorp (10/10/2013) [-]
Well going from 2D to 3D isn't really minor.
#36 to #33 - Hightower ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Fixed camera angles man. It's not 3D it's 2D, lust like every other entry, just with improved sprites.
User avatar #313 to #36 - alstorp (10/11/2013) [-]
"Unlike previous games in the main series, Pokémon X and Y feature a three dimensional style of gameplay, and 3D modeled characters and creatures are used, rather than sprites like has always been done in the main series."
User avatar #24 to #23 - soupkittenagain (10/10/2013) [-]
I see.... Well I hope one day that they realize the potential of how amazing Pokemon could be as a console game. They actually have addressed that not too long ago. They said it probably won't happen...
#25 to #24 - Hightower ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Ya, it's kinda ****** . The series had potential to be a major console rpg. Just think of how much of the world could fit onto a console game, and how many other pokemon games could have had their mechanics incorporated into it. They could have had side games like Snap, or Stadium.
User avatar #30 to #21 - chitownbrownie (10/10/2013) [-]
I liked the ones that came out for gamecube, those were awesome
User avatar #146 to #21 - doctorhue (10/10/2013) [-]
When you can sit on benches in your favorite games, then talk to me.
#206 to #146 - blokrokker (10/10/2013) [-]
*ahem*

But seriously, Altair has some monster ******* hands, goddamn.
User avatar #26 to #21 - subtard ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
While every shooter is exactly the same but with different looking guns
And every sports game is exactly the same but with different names on the back of jerseys.
#208 to #26 - ghettoham (10/10/2013) [-]
Are you kidding me? So you're saying shooters haven't changed since Quake, Doom and golden eye yeah?   
   
Because half-life didn't basically invent scripting did it? And Halo didn't begin the whole &quot;two weapon and regenerating health&quot; thing either right? Its just always been that way. And CoD4 didn't show everyone just how good scripting can get right?    
   
Yes, you are correct in saying that in recent times, the shooter genre hasn't really advanced too much. But you look back at when the first pokemon games came out and the shooters at the same time, then look at modern shooters and tell me that things haven't changed.   
   
Pokemon has not had a major change in gameplay style or direction, ever. It hasn't evolved. Maybe because it doesn't need to, but you can't hate the people who say they wanted something more this time.   
   
And no idea about sports games, don't play them.
Are you kidding me? So you're saying shooters haven't changed since Quake, Doom and golden eye yeah?

Because half-life didn't basically invent scripting did it? And Halo didn't begin the whole "two weapon and regenerating health" thing either right? Its just always been that way. And CoD4 didn't show everyone just how good scripting can get right?

Yes, you are correct in saying that in recent times, the shooter genre hasn't really advanced too much. But you look back at when the first pokemon games came out and the shooters at the same time, then look at modern shooters and tell me that things haven't changed.

Pokemon has not had a major change in gameplay style or direction, ever. It hasn't evolved. Maybe because it doesn't need to, but you can't hate the people who say they wanted something more this time.

And no idea about sports games, don't play them.
#196 to #26 - Rascal (10/10/2013) [-]
Spoken like someone who has never actually played a shooter before. Please go watch some Halo and then go watch some CoD or some BF and tell me how it's guns painted different. They all play differently, have a lot of different features, balance, tactics and all present different oppurtunities. Please actually put some hours into various shooters before you say they're all the same. I know it's 'cool' to hate on shooters because god forbid anyone like anything popular on the internet, but when you espouse these tired opinions you sound really stupid to anyone who has actually played a shooter before.
#27 to #26 - frolite (10/10/2013) [-]
He's right tho. Pokemon games haven't changed much at all since 98 its been pretty much the same thing just adding a new map, new pokemon, better graphics. Call of Duty and most other fps franchines are guilty of the same thing but because we were raised around pokemon it's ok for them to do it but god forbid another franchise decides to follow that blueprint. I loved pokemon i really did Dragonite is still my favorite since Lance mopped the floor with me with his back in Red version. And I'm itching to get back into it might buy me a DS just for pokemon X. But we all know what's to expect it's been the same dam thing since 98.
User avatar #79 to #27 - ZenMacros ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Except that's not true at all given the tons of features that have been added/revamped throughout the years. Saying the only thing they add are maps, Pokemon, and better graphics is an exaggeration.
#90 to #79 - frolite (10/10/2013) [-]
Like what exactly the challenge tower back in gold and silver? Other then that there really wasn't anything new. Emerald added an entire island full of those trainer towers. All you do is catch pokemon raise your favorites beat the elite 4 maybe fill the pokedex if you really want And that's about it revamping things isn't exactly adding anything new. I'm not defending CoD in anyway don't like fps titles never really got into them but they're guilty of the same thing revamping and polishing old ideas and adding a little tweak here and there but nothing truely new.
User avatar #103 to #90 - ZenMacros ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Physical/Special split and abilities are the first things that come to mind, and they both had a huge effect on how battles play out. Not to mention adding types and a ******* of moves, fixing the type chart, hold items, and for X/Y, horde encounters and sky battles, and that's only counting things that have/had an effect on actual battles. Other aspects are a different story and there are tons of things that have been added. Sure, you still catch Pokemon and raise them and beat gyms/E4 (and to be honest, I myself am getting tired of that same formula), but that's mainly what Pokemon is about.

I will say that these things are added gradually, so there typically isn't a huge change in between a gen and the following gen (except the first two things I mentioned), but they add up over time. So I will agree they don't put too much effort into changing the games between gens, but saying it hasn't changed much since gen I is just ridiculous.
#243 to #103 - frolite (10/11/2013) [-]
So basically nothing changed until X/Y is what you're saying.
User avatar #252 to #243 - ZenMacros ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
Except most of the things I mentioned were implemented long before X/Y. It's like you didn't even read my comment.
#256 to #252 - frolite (10/11/2013) [-]
Pretty sure special attacks have been around since Red and Blue. So they just added moves? Kinda like how CoD just adds guns. Holding items have been around since Gold and Silver thats nothing special. Gold and Silver added Steel types as far as i know that was the only new type until X/Y. I'm not saying pokemon sucks or anything but for people to act as if it really changed or done anything substantially different since release is just silly.
User avatar #259 to #256 - ZenMacros ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
First off, saying what Gold/Silver added does nothing for your argument seeing as how you're claiming nothing has changed since Red/Blue.

Second, I know Special attacks have been around since the beginning. I'm referring to the split between Physical and Special. Before, whether a move was Physical or Special depended on its type (eg: Fire type moves were Special, Rock type moves were Physical, etc.). In Gen IV a split between the two was implemented that made it so any type move could be Physical or Special depending on what the actual move itself was. This change was incredibly significant for battling.
#270 to #259 - frolite (10/11/2013) [-]
So since red and blue all they did was split type special attacks add new pokemon. Let you battle more then one pokemon at a time. And what was it horde battles? I'm grossly ignorant to pokemon games after gen 3 never saw it really going in any new direction so i went with a PSP instead. All i played on my GBA was pokemon anyways but it's fine all i wanted to say was that pokemon never really evolved (get it) since Red and blue. But yeah i guess agree to disagree.
User avatar #271 to #270 - ZenMacros ONLINE (10/11/2013) [-]
No, I actually said they did a lot more than just that. But yeah, agree to disagree.
#94 to #27 - Visual (10/10/2013) [-]
You forgot to mention that since the originals, they added double battles, triple battles, rotation battles, new types, online matchmaking, each game has it's own little mini-game unrelated to battling, pokemon forms, and a handful more features I can't think off the top of my head right now. I mean sure, it is still based around battling pokemon in a turn-based matches. But they change it up so much that it feels greater every new game, it feels fresh while not feeling entirely new.

Sure it's understandable if you don't like the games, but to say it's not growing or changing is completely untrue.

Although shooters revolve around just point-and-click at enemies and doesn't feel as rewarding (to me at least) compared to outwitting your opponent with a carefully picked and trained team. Don't get me wrong, I still really like shooters, I play Team Fortress 2 and Battlefield 3 a lot.
#141 to #94 - frolite (10/10/2013) [-]
So 20 years into the franchise all they have is adding two more or three more pokemon into a battle? And some mini games? Online matchmaking is pretty much a must nowadays so thats not really anything too amazing. I loved pokemon just as much as the next kid growing up i mean dam i cried so hard when my little cousin reset my crystal version and i lost a 86 dragonite. My point is Pokemon has shown as much innovation as CoD since release. Still getting X tho.
User avatar #107 to #94 - ZenMacros ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
Wow, how could I forget about double/triple/rotation battles?
#197 to #27 - jinkazama (10/10/2013) [-]
Pokemon X is to pokemon red what borderlands is to timesplitters. Using the same basic combat doesn't make it the same game. Pokemon has changed massively in the competitive scene and goes very deep as far as strategy is concerned.

Plus you know, double battles, triple batles, rotation battles, sky battles, horde battles, pokemon contests, pokemon movie studio etc...the list goes on.

Pokemon has changed massively. It's still a party based turn based rpg. And if you don't like that then fine, but saying it hasn't changed is just ignorant. If you want an entirely new core mechanic then go play a spin off. There are plenty of good ones like mystery dungeon and ranger which are nothing like the main series.
#245 to #197 - frolite (10/11/2013) [-]
So it took 20 years to make any real changes into the game franchise? Not saying i don't like it i loved pokemon growing up. I'm not looking for something different im just saying that you guys demonize other franchises because of its repetitiveness and almost no change from the previous and pokemon has done this but nostalgia makes you guys ignore it and say that it's changed SO much when it really hasn't. Double battles? Triple battles? really? Thats some innovative stuff right there.
#324 to #245 - jinkazama (10/12/2013) [-]
Gen two: Additional types along with splitting special into special atk and def. Also two regions and time based events.

Gen 3: Double battles. More multiplayer features such as secret bases. Attacks split into physical and special based on their type. Addition of abilities which have massively changed the entire game. Contests added. IVs and EVs massively overhauled (that was the reason for no gen 2 -> gen 3 trading)

Gen 4: Specific moves split into physical and special. No longer type based. Addition of online battling and trading. GTS added. Multiplayer content in the form of the underground. Addition of other things such as poffin making. Contests overhauled.

Gen 5: Much more deep plot. Triple battles. Rotation battles. Memory link in B&W2. Addition of medals (basically achievements). Addition of C gear. Addition of dream world. Addition of global link. Randomized online battles added (friend code not needed). Wifi used for events so they were no longer unavailable to some. Pokemon musicals. Pokemon movie studio. In-game seasons.

Gen 6: Graphical overhaul. Graphics now in full 3d rather than 2d sprites. Mega evolutions. Sky battles. Horde battles. Super training. Pokemon ami. Player search system. Fairy type added. Weather effects nerfed. Some type matchups changed. Trainer customization added. 3d rather than grid based movement.

As you can see there have been significant changes each gen. The only common factor is the very core of gameplay. Party of 6. 4 moves. Turn based. The game now has a massive competitive community due to the depth it has gained.

The problem i have with cod is not that it's similar to older cods. It's that they charge $60 for as much content that you'd get in a borderlands dlc pack. Personally i like cod. I find the gameplay fun. But i only play it at friends houses, because i don't feel like it's worth the money.
#169 to #26 - prominant (10/10/2013) [-]
That's not actually true about sports games but I see your point
#311 to #169 - Rascal (10/11/2013) [-]
Remember everyone here is fat and doesn't like sports.
#28 to #26 - Hightower ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
So Left 4 Dead and Bionic Commando are the same game with just different guns? No. The mechanics of gameplay vary greatly within the FPS genre. While I will agree that some games are just a rehash of the last game, Call of Warfare: Modern Duty Battlefield Ops is a good example, there are massive differences within the genre. Sports games are all basically a re-release of last years game with new people, I'll give you that.
Even within the same series games can have massive differences between titles. Morrowind and Skyrim are not the same game, despite being similar in a lot of ways, and belonging to the same series. Look at the differences in simple games like Super Mario. Just between the two most recent console titles there are massive differences in style and gameplay mechanics. If they did like Pokemon the New Super Mario Brothers would be the way all SMB games are, but we also have games like the Galaxy series.
St it IS possible to make sequels that vary from title to title all while maintaining the series structure and integrity.
#276 to #26 - Rascal (10/11/2013) [-]
actually madden has been declining lately, but this year has fixed so much that it is prolly the best madden i have ever played, i no its still the same concept and stuff but the little things make a big difference, i love pokemon to but a good sports game that isnt easy for one person to dominate in is a lot of fun
User avatar #153 to #26 - guidedhand ONLINE (10/10/2013) [-]
I just wanna put it out there that i think FPS games almost have 'speeds' associated with them. Ie COD is a very fast almost twitch game, while Halo is a little slower (you dont just rush spray and die, it takes skill to kill someone), Battlefield is a little slower again and ARMA games are about as slow as you can get
User avatar #65 to #26 - thekinganon (10/10/2013) [-]
The same little updates pokemon has is the same ones sports games have. I'm saying this as a lover of pokemon and football.
#261 - ahkillyou (10/11/2013) [-]
Gameinformer gave Pokemon X/Y a 8.75 out of 10 and the silver medal.    
What are you Poké-bitches whining about? No one said its a bad game.    
God forbid your precious game recieves anything less than a 			*******		 10. As if it even matters because you're going to end up buying the 			*******		 thing anyway. And if a numerical score from somebody else's review on a game that you wanted is going to deter you from buying it now, well you must not really like Pokémon in the first 			******		 place.............			****		.
Gameinformer gave Pokemon X/Y a 8.75 out of 10 and the silver medal.
What are you Poké-bitches whining about? No one said its a bad game.
God forbid your precious game recieves anything less than a ******* 10. As if it even matters because you're going to end up buying the ******* thing anyway. And if a numerical score from somebody else's review on a game that you wanted is going to deter you from buying it now, well you must not really like Pokémon in the first ****** place............. **** .





#273 to #261 - wagastragas (10/11/2013) [-]
its just pointing the irony on it dont get so butthurt
#274 to #261 - aludin (10/11/2013) [-]
All pokemon games are the same, if they expect them to add a physics engine or some **** like that then they need to go and sit in a corner
User avatar #278 to #261 - reginleif (10/11/2013) [-]
listen not a pokefag here, I gave up trying to catch em all since emerald.

But in a world of inflated gaming critic scores, an 8 is still bad. When you compare it to other games that WEREN'T special but still got a 9..

I mean AC3 got a metascore of 85, and it was ok.
#264 to #261 - boomheadshot (10/11/2013) [-]
you sound a little angry take this
you sound a little angry take this
User avatar #285 - Johnsfer (10/11/2013) [-]
To people who say pokemon hasn't changed since gen 1 how about this
- Online battling
- Breeding
- New pokemon types
- New regions
- LIke 400 new pokemon
- Online Trading
- A whole lot of new side content other than just catching more pokemon
- Now character customization to some extent.

And don't give me that ******** on how the pokemon designs have gotten lazy, did you forget that some of gen 1's pokemon included:
- A rock with arms
- A pile of goo
- A Jellyfish
- bodybuilders
There are constantly great new pokemon being added.
tl:dr Pokemon is changing and evolving(lol) and it isn't this "HURRDURR IT'S JUST LIEK COD NO CHANGES AT ALL"
It plays like pokemon still, but there is so much more compared to the ol' days of Red and Blue, which are still great games.
[ 324 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)